比较前列腺癌放射治疗与根治性前列腺切除术的临床试验系统回顾

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Lauren Hekman , Athena Barrett , Dylan Ross , Eli Palaganas , Prashanth Giridhar , Thiraviyam Elumalai , Pragathee V , Alec M. Block , James S. Welsh , Matthew M. Harkenrider , Sashank Saini , Soumyajit Roy , Ahmer Farooq , Gopal Gupta , Cheng En Hsieh , BhanuPrasad Venkatesulu , Abhishek A. Solanki
{"title":"比较前列腺癌放射治疗与根治性前列腺切除术的临床试验系统回顾","authors":"Lauren Hekman ,&nbsp;Athena Barrett ,&nbsp;Dylan Ross ,&nbsp;Eli Palaganas ,&nbsp;Prashanth Giridhar ,&nbsp;Thiraviyam Elumalai ,&nbsp;Pragathee V ,&nbsp;Alec M. Block ,&nbsp;James S. Welsh ,&nbsp;Matthew M. Harkenrider ,&nbsp;Sashank Saini ,&nbsp;Soumyajit Roy ,&nbsp;Ahmer Farooq ,&nbsp;Gopal Gupta ,&nbsp;Cheng En Hsieh ,&nbsp;BhanuPrasad Venkatesulu ,&nbsp;Abhishek A. Solanki","doi":"10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The treatment landscape for localized and regional prostate cancer includes active surveillance, radiation therapy (RT), and radical prostatectomy (RP). Population-based studies comparing RP to radiation reveal conflicting results due to methodological flaws. This systematic review and pooled analysis of studies aim to compare cause-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and toxicity outcomes, comparing RP to RT in the management of prostate cancer. This systematic review search included the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane libraries according to the PRISMA statement with the inception of each database up to June 24, 2023. Randomized phase 2 or 3 clinical trials that compared RP to RT in prostate cancer were included. The forest plot for the Odds ratio (OR) was plotted using the Mantel–Haenszel method, and the Z test was used to assess significance. A fixed effects model was used for meta-analysis. The search yielded seven completed randomized clinical trials and four ongoing trials. The majority of complete trials had low to intermediate-risk patient populations. OR for OS was 1.00 with 95% CI, 0.71-1.41 (<em>P</em>-value: 0.98), CSS OR was 0.99 with 95% CI, 0.45-2.18 (<em>P</em>-value 0.11), OR for DFS was 1.26 with 95% CI, 0.89-1.78 (<em>P</em>-value 0.19) when comparing RP to RT. The rate of distant metastatic disease was 2.3% in the RP versus 2.9% in the RT at 10 years. The rate of second malignant neoplasms was 4.5% in the RP compared to 4.2% in the RT arm at 10 years. RP caused more urinary symptoms, with a predominance of the need for urinary pads and a higher incidence of sexual dysfunction, and RT caused a higher incidence of bowel symptoms, such as blood in stools and fecal incontinence. This study provides evidence that the treatment-related outcomes are similar in patients with low to intermediate-risk prostate cancer when comparing RP to RT. Multidisciplinary treatment approaches and factoring patients' values and preferences should form the cornerstone of the ideal treatment option for each patient with localized prostate cancer. Patients with prostate cancer have an equal chance of being cancer-free and alive at 10 years with either RP or RT. In terms of side effects, RP causes more urine leakage and loss of erections, whereas RT tends to cause more bowel side effects, such as blood in stools and fecal leakage.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials Comparing Radiation Therapy Versus Radical Prostatectomy in Prostate Cancer\",\"authors\":\"Lauren Hekman ,&nbsp;Athena Barrett ,&nbsp;Dylan Ross ,&nbsp;Eli Palaganas ,&nbsp;Prashanth Giridhar ,&nbsp;Thiraviyam Elumalai ,&nbsp;Pragathee V ,&nbsp;Alec M. Block ,&nbsp;James S. Welsh ,&nbsp;Matthew M. Harkenrider ,&nbsp;Sashank Saini ,&nbsp;Soumyajit Roy ,&nbsp;Ahmer Farooq ,&nbsp;Gopal Gupta ,&nbsp;Cheng En Hsieh ,&nbsp;BhanuPrasad Venkatesulu ,&nbsp;Abhishek A. Solanki\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102157\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The treatment landscape for localized and regional prostate cancer includes active surveillance, radiation therapy (RT), and radical prostatectomy (RP). Population-based studies comparing RP to radiation reveal conflicting results due to methodological flaws. This systematic review and pooled analysis of studies aim to compare cause-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and toxicity outcomes, comparing RP to RT in the management of prostate cancer. This systematic review search included the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane libraries according to the PRISMA statement with the inception of each database up to June 24, 2023. Randomized phase 2 or 3 clinical trials that compared RP to RT in prostate cancer were included. The forest plot for the Odds ratio (OR) was plotted using the Mantel–Haenszel method, and the Z test was used to assess significance. A fixed effects model was used for meta-analysis. The search yielded seven completed randomized clinical trials and four ongoing trials. The majority of complete trials had low to intermediate-risk patient populations. OR for OS was 1.00 with 95% CI, 0.71-1.41 (<em>P</em>-value: 0.98), CSS OR was 0.99 with 95% CI, 0.45-2.18 (<em>P</em>-value 0.11), OR for DFS was 1.26 with 95% CI, 0.89-1.78 (<em>P</em>-value 0.19) when comparing RP to RT. The rate of distant metastatic disease was 2.3% in the RP versus 2.9% in the RT at 10 years. The rate of second malignant neoplasms was 4.5% in the RP compared to 4.2% in the RT arm at 10 years. RP caused more urinary symptoms, with a predominance of the need for urinary pads and a higher incidence of sexual dysfunction, and RT caused a higher incidence of bowel symptoms, such as blood in stools and fecal incontinence. This study provides evidence that the treatment-related outcomes are similar in patients with low to intermediate-risk prostate cancer when comparing RP to RT. Multidisciplinary treatment approaches and factoring patients' values and preferences should form the cornerstone of the ideal treatment option for each patient with localized prostate cancer. Patients with prostate cancer have an equal chance of being cancer-free and alive at 10 years with either RP or RT. In terms of side effects, RP causes more urine leakage and loss of erections, whereas RT tends to cause more bowel side effects, such as blood in stools and fecal leakage.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1558767324001289\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1558767324001289","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

局部和区域性前列腺癌的治疗方法包括积极监测、放射治疗(RT)和根治性前列腺切除术(RP)。基于人群的研究比较了前列腺癌根治术和放疗,发现由于方法上的缺陷,结果相互矛盾。本系统综述和汇总分析研究旨在比较前列腺癌治疗中RP与RT的病因特异性生存率(CSS)、总生存率(OS)、无病生存率(DFS)和毒性结果。根据 PRISMA 声明,本系统性综述检索包括 PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane 图书馆,每个数据库的起始时间均截至 2023 年 6 月 24 日。纳入了比较前列腺癌 RP 与 RT 的 2 期或 3 期随机临床试验。采用Mantel-Haenszel方法绘制了比值比(OR)森林图,并使用Z检验评估显著性。荟萃分析采用固定效应模型。搜索结果包括七项已完成的随机临床试验和四项正在进行的试验。大多数完整试验的患者为中低风险人群。将 RP 与 RT 相比,OS OR 为 1.00,95% CI 为 0.71-1.41(P 值:0.98);CSS OR 为 0.99,95% CI 为 0.45-2.18(P 值:0.11);DFS OR 为 1.26,95% CI 为 0.89-1.78(P 值:0.19)。10年后,RP的远处转移性疾病发生率为2.3%,而RT为2.9%。10年后,RP治疗组的二次恶性肿瘤发生率为4.5%,而RT治疗组为4.2%。RP引起的泌尿系统症状较多,主要表现为需要尿垫和性功能障碍,而RT引起的肠道症状较多,如便血和大便失禁。这项研究提供的证据表明,在比较RP和RT时,低危和中危前列腺癌患者的治疗相关结果相似。多学科治疗方法以及患者的价值观和偏好应成为每位局部前列腺癌患者理想治疗方案的基石。前列腺癌患者接受 RP 或 RT 治疗,10 年后无癌和存活的几率相同。就副作用而言,前列腺癌根治术会导致更多的漏尿及勃起功能丧失,而前列腺癌根治术则会导致更多的肠道副作用,如便血和漏粪。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials Comparing Radiation Therapy Versus Radical Prostatectomy in Prostate Cancer

The treatment landscape for localized and regional prostate cancer includes active surveillance, radiation therapy (RT), and radical prostatectomy (RP). Population-based studies comparing RP to radiation reveal conflicting results due to methodological flaws. This systematic review and pooled analysis of studies aim to compare cause-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and toxicity outcomes, comparing RP to RT in the management of prostate cancer. This systematic review search included the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane libraries according to the PRISMA statement with the inception of each database up to June 24, 2023. Randomized phase 2 or 3 clinical trials that compared RP to RT in prostate cancer were included. The forest plot for the Odds ratio (OR) was plotted using the Mantel–Haenszel method, and the Z test was used to assess significance. A fixed effects model was used for meta-analysis. The search yielded seven completed randomized clinical trials and four ongoing trials. The majority of complete trials had low to intermediate-risk patient populations. OR for OS was 1.00 with 95% CI, 0.71-1.41 (P-value: 0.98), CSS OR was 0.99 with 95% CI, 0.45-2.18 (P-value 0.11), OR for DFS was 1.26 with 95% CI, 0.89-1.78 (P-value 0.19) when comparing RP to RT. The rate of distant metastatic disease was 2.3% in the RP versus 2.9% in the RT at 10 years. The rate of second malignant neoplasms was 4.5% in the RP compared to 4.2% in the RT arm at 10 years. RP caused more urinary symptoms, with a predominance of the need for urinary pads and a higher incidence of sexual dysfunction, and RT caused a higher incidence of bowel symptoms, such as blood in stools and fecal incontinence. This study provides evidence that the treatment-related outcomes are similar in patients with low to intermediate-risk prostate cancer when comparing RP to RT. Multidisciplinary treatment approaches and factoring patients' values and preferences should form the cornerstone of the ideal treatment option for each patient with localized prostate cancer. Patients with prostate cancer have an equal chance of being cancer-free and alive at 10 years with either RP or RT. In terms of side effects, RP causes more urine leakage and loss of erections, whereas RT tends to cause more bowel side effects, such as blood in stools and fecal leakage.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信